to think this couple should not be allowed to keep their baby?

[FuckOffWeasel]

How can there be any discussion?

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-woman-having-baby-convicted-7729662

People don't compare pedophilia to homosexuality to indicate homosexuality is a perversion, it's just a way of illustrating that you can't change sexual preference.

You could look at of another way- I'm straight but if society decided I should be having sex with dogs, they are not going to be able to persuade me to do this are they? Possibly they could try and persuade me Having sex with men is wrong. I might agree for a bit. They will Make me feel ashamed. But eventually my needs are likely to take over, when I see a gorgeous man in a bar, or meet someone I fancy at work...

The thing is , homosexuality has only recently (relatively speaking) been legal, in the UK anyway.

To chose homosexuality as the comparator to paedophilia being something one can't change is to revert back to making homosexuality "other".

And as I've said upthread I don't consider paedophilia another version of natural sexuality. All other forms involve consenting parties.

Paedophilia, like beastiality and necrophilia has no mutual consent. It is a perversion.

I think they are both scum frankly.
Him for the obvious reasons, her for deliberately bringing a child into the world that she had no intention of raising. She knew from the day he told, her exactly what would happen!

She knew from the day he told, her exactly what would happen!

did she though? maybe she was naïve, maybe he pulled the wool over her eyes with all this talk of how he'd done his time and been rehabilitated. maybe she really thought he had been deemed "safe" by the authorities and having a baby would not be an issue.

I still can't fathom how anyone even brings themselves to have sex with a bloke they know is turned on by kids. Bleurgh!

Pedophiles are also female. While I agree that this woman has wilfully allowed this man to do an absolute number on her and is probably vulnerable in some sense, she may think "so what?"

A previous poster mentioned a man tormented by his attraction to children. Perhaps he genuinely was but I think it's important to remember just how devious and manipulative people who fantasise about abusing and raping infants and children are.

That story about the toddler who was put in the bath is so sad. Shocking that they have kids together now.

Unfortunately the Internet has escalated the problem hugely, these people join groups that seek to reassure themselves that what they are doing is normal, those who begin a mild curiosity are quickly encouraged to act and it spirals from there ! I don't believe rehabilitation works, I agree that those courses are put on so the government is seen to be doing something and quite frankly I don't think it's good enough !

There is also the issue that a percentage of paedophiles were themselves abused as children but by not keeping them away from all temptation the circle of abuse continues.

I think they should be locked securely away for life.

Cora

It was me who mentioned that particular man. He'd never been convicted of anything relating to paedophilia, images or touching.

He'd volunteered himself for therapy and wasn't very old. Early 20-mid 20's.

Of course he could have been lying. But what I took from him was that it is not uncontrollable and that those who do offend, wilfully choose do so.

I'm starting to question the idea that abusers were abused themselves.

It seems like a way to make abused people feel feel ashamed and a way for actual abusers to gain sympathy.

More girls are abused than boys so if it was really true there would be more female pedophiles than male pedophiles.

The Australian couple David and Wendy Farnell have been allowed to keep their daughter even though he is a convicted sex offender.

Pedophiles should not be allowed near children!!

Who in their right mind would take such a massive risk??

Paedophilia isn't a sexual orientation the way heterosexuality and homosexuality are. Paedophilia is a pathology. It's a deviation from a normally developed sexuality which often happens due to trauma or abuse during childhood. This isn't necessarily sexual trauma.
That's not to say that all paedophiles were abused as children, some just develop the pathology as teens or adults.

I think more women report historic abuse, than men, particularly sexual abuse.

Some abused children do go on to be adults who abuse children. Sexual abuse isn't the only form of it. Having a mother who knowingly allowed her husband/latest partner to abuse you rather than leave is a form of abuse. Or having one who allowed you to go into care rather than leave him. I spent a year of my life dealing with that. I used to go home and cry every day. It is very common.

Not every person who was abused as a child goes on to abuse their own children, of course they don't.

Much like every person who was bullied as a child doesn't grow up to be a bully. But some do.

My own dp had a very dysfunctional upbringing. A lot of lies (huge ones), an alcoholic, emotionally abusive mother who roundly manipulated all who crossed her path. I know part of him is frightened he cannot be a good parent because of it.

Alis

I respect your opinion in that scenario and perhaps my opinion is overly cynical. I would still see that person as being manipulative as he is able to draw people in, to feel sorry for him and perhaps start to feel that he couldn't help it. Reframing his urge to sexually abuse and rape children as an uncontrollable attraction to prepubescent bodies is, as far as I see it, devious and manipulative and if not so at the very least a very serious denial of the nature of pedophilia.

Cora

I see exactly where you're coming from. For me it just offered a different perspective on how the mind of a paedophile works.

At the end of the day, regardless of his self control, he like all other paedophiles, wanted to have sex with children.

Even if this mother did decide to choose the baby and cut herself off from the man, she's shown such poor decision-making so far that I doubt that would be the end of the matter: mightn't SS take the child anyway?

Deaky I'm pretty certain your friend is talking (at least partial) rubbish. The child would not be taken away never for her to see it again with her screaming she'd changed her mind.
S.services would not have stayed away because he preferred to sexually abuse male children. He is a paedophile. Full stop.
Of course they'd get involved again, by the sounds of it she stayed with the paedophile.

If not the baby will be under child protection order poor kid what chance has it got

He is a unrepentant child abuser and she is a fucking idiot.

Nutshell, MrsDeVere.

Reputable, no, if she genuinely separated from him and showed regret and insight into her mistake and his level of risk they wouldn't remove the child (necessarily, this is hypothetical of course). They would keep the child on a CP plan and monitor closely for a period of time.

She must be pretty dim if she really thought she

a) should have a child with this man, and

b) thought she would actually be allowed to keep it, all the while she stayed in a relationship with him.

If she cannot see the very obvious and serious risks this poses then she is probably not fit the raise the child anyway, even if she agrees to go 'no contact' with him. Her judgement is very poor and her standards are very low. It would only be a matter of time before she was manipulated by some other dangerous, predatorary man.

predatory

AskBasil

There are various courses but basically they all work on looking at the offender's behaviour and why it is wrong and on looking at the impact on the victims.

Many offenders who have downloaded images of children see it as a victimless crime, that the children photographed are willing and that the images are out there so someone else looking doesn't make a difference.

The course this man possibly went on would look at the victim, at the impact on them and alongside looking at their own (offender) behaviour and also some tactics for not going back to that behaviour.

As some have said you cannot change someone's sexuality but you can educate them about acceptable behaviour.

Back to the OP

There is more to this, a custodial sentence is unusual for a first offence so it may have not been a first offence, or the images were particularly bad. It doesn't say how many of each category does it? Someone with 1000 images where 998 are level 1 would indicate their interest is in level one, but if 998 are level 5 that paints a different picture.

EhricLovesTheBhrothers sorry but if they show a definate preference to one sex the social workers do not necessarily have to tell you its well documented even in the press there was a lady who had three children with a husband she had one of the opposite sex and was appalled when they showed up i know the case was a few years ago but it still stands

and as she had moved on had therapy was in a stable relationship with a different person miles away from her ex and nothing to do with her ex i fail to see why they would be involved on such a grand scale the second time yes she had the child adopted the first time but that was more to being young stupid and under pressure from them to do the right thing by her child she thought that was her only option if everyone who put their child in care for the best had their future children removed there would be far too many children in care it was overkill what they did to her pure and simple